I can't take an article seriously that starts like this:
> The greenies’ dream of “clean” (except for millions of dead birds) energy from wind farms is dying in the face of the poor economics (even with tax subsidies) and unreliable technology
Stupid greenies! I was right to be sceptic, look at the end:
> It is beyond the time to end subsidies for wind power. Not only has atmospheric CO2 risen without serious consequence, the doomsaying models proven consistently wrong, but the financial thumb on the scale via subsidies has encouraged development of a technology that is still immature, if it ever will be viable.
> The greenies’ dream of “clean” (except for millions of dead birds) energy from wind farms is dying in the face of the poor economics (even with tax subsidies) and unreliable technology
Stupid greenies! I was right to be sceptic, look at the end:
> It is beyond the time to end subsidies for wind power. Not only has atmospheric CO2 risen without serious consequence, the doomsaying models proven consistently wrong, but the financial thumb on the scale via subsidies has encouraged development of a technology that is still immature, if it ever will be viable.
Can't trust an article that gets basic facts wrong. FT reports differently: https://www.ft.com/content/74ff8ff7-8009-413a-8f2e-2a3c34695...